On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that four Uber drivers have actually been Uber employees all along.  

In the Court’s view, Uber had enough control over those drivers’ businesses that they couldn’t be considered contractors.  

The Court convinced itself that those drivers could not really run apps from competitors like Didi and Ola, or even Door Dash, at the same time.  

Uber drivers who accept at least 85 per cent of offered rides get information about the direction and duration of offered rides. The decision concluded that drivers would not risk taking a ride from another app because doing so would mean having to turn down rides offered by Uber. 

I wonder whether any of the justices have ever ridden in an Uber. If they had, they would know Uber drivers are undeterred by the Court’s imagined problem. 

The solution is obvious. Drivers taking a ride for another company simply log out of Uber while on that other ride. No rides are offered to drivers who are not logged in.  

It is a strange kind of employment that allows you to take on jobs for a competitor while on the clock.  

The Court’s ruling opens no end of messes.  

Most obviously, an Ipsos survey of Uber drivers shows they really value not being in a standard employment relationship. Uber is flexible. They can drive, or not, as suits their schedules. It will be impracticable to run Uber on an employment model with that kind of flexibility. Rostered shifts are far more likely.  

But there are more problems.  

Deloitte tax expert Robyn Walker wonders what Inland Revenue will do. 

You see, Uber drivers run their own businesses, driving for Uber and other companies. Their vehicles are business expenses – along with running costs and road user charges. They may have taken a GST credit on the car purchase. 

Employees cannot claim deductions for costs associated with earning income nor be GST-registered for services provided to their employer. Inland Revenue will have to decide whether drivers are employees for tax purposes and, if so, how to unwind years of now-incorrect tax filings.  

It risks being a terrible, terrible mess.  

The Select Committee is due to report back on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill just before Christmas. That Bill makes clear that platform drivers are not employees.  

I hope that that legislation can quickly clean up the mess that our enlightened Court has created.